Impact of Fuel Subsidy Removal Policy on Fish Farmers' Input Utilization in Yenagoa Agricultural Zone, Bayelsa State, Nigeria

Abstract

This study analyzed the effect of the fuel subsidy removal policy on agricultural input utilization among fish farmers in Yenagoa Agricultural zone of Bayelsa state Nigeria. Fuel subsidy removal is intended to help reduce Nigeria’s dependence on imported fuel, increase the country’s economy and job creation, incentivize domestic refineries to produce more petroleum products, and free up resources for other sectors of the economy. Multi-staged sampling techniques were used for collecting data from eighty (80) respondents who were randomly selected from eight communities in Yenagoa Local Government Area. The data for this study were collected using primary and secondary data collection techniques. The effect of fuel subsidy removal on the profitability of fish farmers and the awareness level of fish farmers on federal government fuel subsidy removal in the study area was determined using a 3-point Likert-type rating scale. On the awareness level of fish farmers on federal government fuel subsidy removal, the result revealed that awareness of fuel subsidy removal and that fuel subsidy removal affected fish farming had mean scores of 2.30 and 2.29, respectively. On the effect of fuel subsidy removal on the profitability of fish farmers in the study area, the result revealed that fish farmers indicated removal of fuel subsidy has drastically increased the cost of inputs, and transportation costs, reduced household income, caused inflation, and reduced their purchasing power with mean scores of 2.45, 2.43, 2.28, 2.25 and 2.16, respectively. The simple regression result showed an inverse relationship existed between fuel subsidy removal policy and agricultural inputs utilization among fish farmers in the study area. Hence, fuel subsidy removal resulting in high production costs in fish production will reduce agricultural input utilization among fish farmers in the study area. Therefore, the null hypothesis (H01) that the fuel subsidy removal policy has no significant effect on fish farming utilization of inputs in the study area was rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (HA1) was upheld. The study, therefore, recommends employing more extension agents to educate rural fish farmers, developing strategies for integrated commercial fish farming to reduce costs and increase profits. Also, the government should invest in alternative energy sources and strengthen refineries to mitigate the impacts of fuel subsidy removal.